The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.

<h4>Background</h4>Congenital Toxoplasmosis (CT) can have severe consequences. France, Austria, and Slovenia have prenatal screening programs whereas some other countries are considering universal screening to reduce congenital transmission and severity of infection in children. The effi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Christine Binquet, Catherine Lejeune, Valérie Seror, François Peyron, Anne-Claire Bertaux, Olivier Scemama, Catherine Quantin, Sophie Béjean, Eileen Stillwaggon, Martine Wallon
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221709
id doaj-54397543fe9d49a594249a9ab78a1a78
record_format Article
spelling doaj-54397543fe9d49a594249a9ab78a1a782021-03-04T10:24:23ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01149e022170910.1371/journal.pone.0221709The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.Christine BinquetCatherine LejeuneValérie SerorFrançois PeyronAnne-Claire BertauxOlivier ScemamaCatherine QuantinSophie BéjeanEileen StillwaggonMartine Wallon<h4>Background</h4>Congenital Toxoplasmosis (CT) can have severe consequences. France, Austria, and Slovenia have prenatal screening programs whereas some other countries are considering universal screening to reduce congenital transmission and severity of infection in children. The efficiency of such programs is debated increasingly as seroprevalence among pregnant women and incidence of congenital toxoplasmosis show a steady decrease. In addition, uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of pre- and postnatal treatments.<h4>Method</h4>To identify cost-effective strategies, prenatal and neonatal screenings were compared using a decision-analytic model based on French guidelines and current knowledge of long-term evolution of the disease in treated children. Epidemiological data were extracted from the scientific literature and clinical data from the French Lyon cohort. Strategies were compared at one year of age, when infection can be definitively evaluated, and at 15 years of age, after which validated outcome data become scarce. The analysis was performed from the French Health Insurance System perspective and included direct medical costs for pregnant women and their children.<h4>Results</h4>The 1-year Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio showed that prenatal screening would require investing €14,826 to avoid one adverse event (liveborn with CT, fetal loss, neonatal death or pregnancy termination) compared to neonatal screening. Extra investment increased up to €21,472 when considering the 15-year endpoint.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Prenatal screening is cost-effective as compared to neonatal screening in moderate prevalence areas with predominant Type II strains. In addition, prenatal screening, by providing closer follow-up of women at risk increases the number of occasions for education avoiding toxoplasmosis.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221709
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Christine Binquet
Catherine Lejeune
Valérie Seror
François Peyron
Anne-Claire Bertaux
Olivier Scemama
Catherine Quantin
Sophie Béjean
Eileen Stillwaggon
Martine Wallon
spellingShingle Christine Binquet
Catherine Lejeune
Valérie Seror
François Peyron
Anne-Claire Bertaux
Olivier Scemama
Catherine Quantin
Sophie Béjean
Eileen Stillwaggon
Martine Wallon
The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Christine Binquet
Catherine Lejeune
Valérie Seror
François Peyron
Anne-Claire Bertaux
Olivier Scemama
Catherine Quantin
Sophie Béjean
Eileen Stillwaggon
Martine Wallon
author_sort Christine Binquet
title The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
title_short The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
title_full The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
title_fullStr The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
title_full_unstemmed The cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
title_sort cost-effectiveness of neonatal versus prenatal screening for congenital toxoplasmosis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description <h4>Background</h4>Congenital Toxoplasmosis (CT) can have severe consequences. France, Austria, and Slovenia have prenatal screening programs whereas some other countries are considering universal screening to reduce congenital transmission and severity of infection in children. The efficiency of such programs is debated increasingly as seroprevalence among pregnant women and incidence of congenital toxoplasmosis show a steady decrease. In addition, uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of pre- and postnatal treatments.<h4>Method</h4>To identify cost-effective strategies, prenatal and neonatal screenings were compared using a decision-analytic model based on French guidelines and current knowledge of long-term evolution of the disease in treated children. Epidemiological data were extracted from the scientific literature and clinical data from the French Lyon cohort. Strategies were compared at one year of age, when infection can be definitively evaluated, and at 15 years of age, after which validated outcome data become scarce. The analysis was performed from the French Health Insurance System perspective and included direct medical costs for pregnant women and their children.<h4>Results</h4>The 1-year Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio showed that prenatal screening would require investing €14,826 to avoid one adverse event (liveborn with CT, fetal loss, neonatal death or pregnancy termination) compared to neonatal screening. Extra investment increased up to €21,472 when considering the 15-year endpoint.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Prenatal screening is cost-effective as compared to neonatal screening in moderate prevalence areas with predominant Type II strains. In addition, prenatal screening, by providing closer follow-up of women at risk increases the number of occasions for education avoiding toxoplasmosis.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221709
work_keys_str_mv AT christinebinquet thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT catherinelejeune thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT valerieseror thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT francoispeyron thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT anneclairebertaux thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT olivierscemama thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT catherinequantin thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT sophiebejean thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT eileenstillwaggon thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT martinewallon thecosteffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT christinebinquet costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT catherinelejeune costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT valerieseror costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT francoispeyron costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT anneclairebertaux costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT olivierscemama costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT catherinequantin costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT sophiebejean costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT eileenstillwaggon costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
AT martinewallon costeffectivenessofneonatalversusprenatalscreeningforcongenitaltoxoplasmosis
_version_ 1714806185805217792